tpo 42
The reading and the lecture discuss the harmfulness of mirror on birds and solutions to reduce birds’ injuries. The passage claims that three efficient solutions have been found to prevent this kind of birds' injuries. However, the speaker brings up three reasons to rebut all dubious ideas presented in the passage and states that none of these solutions can effectively stop birds from injuries.
First of all, the writer holds the view that one-way glasses help birds to distinguish glasses. In contrast, the speaker refutes this idea and underlines the fact that this solution will not have any effect on reduction of birds’ injuries for unrecognizing glasses. In fact, one-way glasses are similar to mirrors. As we know, birds cannot distinguish reflection of an item with the real item. In other words, birds cannot understand mirrors, for instance, a bird that sees the sky reflection on a one-way glass may hit it, since the bird thinks that it is the sky.
Second of all, the author contends that colorful designs glasses with a variety of open holes helps to reduce the number of birds injured by hitting with glasses without losing brightness of the rooms. However, the lecturer contradicts this contention and asserts that these paintings have to have some open spaces to let the light enter the room. Birds distinguish these holes and try to fit themselves into these holes. Therefore, they will hit right throw these holes. In order to prevent this situation, these holes should be designed fairly small that will have an effect on the brightness of rooms.
Finally, the passage states that magnetic field on glass can lead birds to opposite direction of hitting with glasses. On the contrary, the professor rebuts this statement and stresses that birds do not use their magnetic sense for short trips. Indeed, they use this sense only for long distance. They rely on their eyes and lights for navigation in short trips. Accordingly, this solution is not practical too
Discourse Markers used:
['accordingly', 'but', 'finally', 'first', 'however', 'may', 'second', 'so', 'therefore', 'for instance', 'in contrast', 'in fact', 'in short', 'kind of', 'first of all', 'in other words', 'on the contrary']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.27688172043 0.261695866417 106% => OK
Verbs: 0.145161290323 0.158904122519 91% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0618279569892 0.0723426182421 85% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0430107526882 0.0435111971325 99% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0241935483871 0.0277247811725 87% => OK
Prepositions: 0.129032258065 0.128828473217 100% => OK
Participles: 0.0215053763441 0.0370669169778 58% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.48312763768 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0295698924731 0.0208969081088 142% => OK
Particles: 0.00268817204301 0.00154638098197 174% => OK
Determiners: 0.129032258065 0.128158765124 101% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0241935483871 0.0158828679856 152% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00537634408602 0.0114777025283 47% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1993.0 1645.83664459 121% => OK
No of words: 330.0 271.125827815 122% => OK
Chars per words: 6.03939393939 6.08160592843 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26214759535 4.04852973271 105% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.351515151515 0.374372842146 94% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.263636363636 0.287516216867 92% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.175757575758 0.187439937562 94% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.118181818182 0.113142543107 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48312763768 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.521212121212 0.539623497131 97% => OK
Word variations: 54.4588536064 53.8517498576 101% => OK
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0529801325 138% => OK
Sentence length: 18.3333333333 21.7502111507 84% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.4127380952 49.3711431718 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.722222222 132.220823453 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3333333333 21.7502111507 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.944444444444 0.878197800319 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 3.39072847682 0% => OK
Readability: 44.696969697 50.5018328374 89% => OK
Elegance: 2.01265822785 1.90840788429 105% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.582098678405 0.549887131256 106% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.145118136285 0.142949733639 102% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0742608438459 0.0787303798458 94% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.530756950685 0.631733273073 84% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.154243201563 0.139662658121 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.219084470491 0.266732575781 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0988915930828 0.103435571967 96% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.347834142422 0.414875509568 84% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0749485919151 0.0530846634433 141% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.405775432732 0.40443939384 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0397665838023 0.0528353158467 75% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.26048565121 164% => OK
Positive topic words: 2.0 3.49668874172 57% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 3.62251655629 110% => OK
Neutral topic words: 2.0 3.1766004415 63% => OK
Total topic words: 8.0 10.2958057395 78% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. The e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.